Do you run in kilometers or miles?

Murph_D

I use kms - converted long before I started running, and don't see any compelling reason to change back. If a plan is in miles, I get out the calculator, or convert on the fly like Ray. But if I'm doing a marathon in an imperial country I'll bring two pace bands, one in kms and one in miles, the latter mostly to check pace against the mile markers. That's the plan anyway - often stop looking after 24k/15m!

Working class heroes

Rockyman7 wrote: »

kms are for lycra tri guys and track fairies,miles are for runners...

Does that mean a name change then? Donadea 31.069m?

LionelNashe

I grew up thinking about distances in miles, but through jogging, I've gradually switched to thinking in terms of kilometers.

positron

Kilometers absolutely.

I made my thoughts clear on DCM thread a while back. I am staying with Kilometers, please go away miles your friends yards, stones, pebbles, sovereigns, chains, pounds etc. Let's please move with rest of the world and leave that old British colony that has the sense to elect Trump as their leader. And Myanmar. Yeaap... US and Myanmar...

GG21057

I run in miles but cycle in kms. No idea why but both work.

I've done a few 5 and 10ks and always use KMs. However, I know a few people doing marathons and out training for them and discussion is still always held in KM. although admittedly, people always round the KM. For example, a marathon is 42km, not 42.2km. If that makes sense.

I rarely ever hear of miles being used. Even in races where it's a mile race, everyone i know converts to km. I'm 29 and would hang around people usually around my own age or a tad older (mid 30s).

run_Forrest_run

I've always trained in miles and don't see the need for changing that. I have found those who train in kilometers tend to use the higher value as if to brag to others when really they are only fooling themselves

Van.Bosch

Ran in miles for 6 years, switched to Km last year.

Currently thinking that I should switch back as I'm running slower, ignoring the fact I am running less and am about 6kg heavier!

JohnDozer

Miles for me. I just like it. I see the benefit of km's in terms of more frequent feedback, but I like the tradition of miles. I won't be changing.

Would the majority of people who swear by metric know their waist size in metric without having to check it? Just wondering...

Van.Bosch

JohnDozer wrote: »

Miles for me. I just like it. I see the benefit of km's in terms of more frequent feedback, but I like the tradition of miles. I won't be changing.

Would the majority of people who swear by metric know their waist size in metric without having to check it? Just wondering...

Nope, I guess that's because all trousers are in inches

adrian522

Not really understanding what difference it makes what other people measure their pace and distance in. Its completely irrelevant. Use whatever you are comfortable with and stick with it. No need to change if you run a race abroad either. In Berlin all the markers were KM markers but I just used a pace band as its much more accurate than a GPS watch anyway.

To be honest on most of your runs you don't need to even keep an eye on your pace, run to effort and learn what the different paces feel like rather than being a slave to the watch.

Lazare

JohnDozer wrote: »

Would the majority of people who swear by metric know their waist size in metric without having to check it? Just wondering...

No, nor would we like to start ordering 473.176mls of Guinness please.

Doesn't change the fact that the metric system is far far superior to the imperial system in terms of precision, simplicity and accuracy.

Lazare

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

I've always trained in miles and don't see the need for changing that. I have found those who train in kilometers tend to use the higher value as if to brag to others when really they are only fooling themselves

What nonsense.

Ironic though that you're scoffing at people for being preoccupied whilst being totally preoccupied yourself.

Just run.

Van.Bosch

Lazare wrote: »

No, nor would we like to start ordering 473.176mls of Guinness please.

Doesn't change the fact that the metric system is far far superior to the imperial system in terms of precision, simplicity and accuracy.

568ml is a pint.

BeepBeep67

Van.Bosch wrote: »

568ml is a pint.

Merica

Peregrinus

Yeah. They have different-sized millilitres in America. Or something.

Murph_D

16-oz pints over there!

Lazare

Just highlights the stupidity of the system really.

Peregrinus

Lazare wrote: »

Just highlights the stupidity of the system really.

I think the tiny American pints are just so cute.

Rockyman7

Working class heroes wrote: »

Does that mean a name change then? Donadea 31.069m?

No.
The OP asked -Would be interested to know what unit system runners here use to track their training and races?
he didnt ask anything about standardised race distances.

joeKel73

adrian522 wrote: »

Not really understanding what difference it makes what other people measure their pace and distance in. Its completely irrelevant.

Maybe irrelevant for your own personal tracking but it creates a barrier for discussing and sharing plans, training progress (DCM novice thread) etc..

Just seems very odd that a different unit system is used as standard depending on the distance you're running.

One place where it would really bug me to use 2 different systems in on Strava, where I log all my runs. Your account has to be either metric or imperial and I have enough OCD to need to run an extra stretch up the road to round my 4.73km run up to 5km, or to round my 6.81 mile run up to 7miles. Flipping between two systems would be a mess! :P

Similar to this... :mad:

BeepBeep67

J o e wrote: »

One place where it would really bug me to use 2 different systems in on Strava, where I log all my runs. Your account has to be either metric or imperial and I have enough OCD to need to run an extra stretch up the road to round my 4.73km run up to 5km, or to round my 6.81 mile run up to 7miles. Flipping between two systems would be a mess! :P

Set the autolap function on your watch to either (imperial) 1M or (metric) 1k and your Strava preference to the other.
Then you can view the default view or laps to have the best of both worlds.

Mulberry

I have a pal called Myles. His nickname is, of course,








...
Kilometers

adrian522

J o e wrote: »

Maybe irrelevant for your own personal tracking but it creates a barrier for discussing and sharing plans, training progress (DCM novice thread) etc..

Not sure how it creates a barrier. Why can't you discuss a plan with someone who uses a different system? It's not difficult as plans typically don't even talk about particular paces only the total distance will be in Miles/KM. It's not like plans have run 10 miles @ 7:20 m/m, it would be more like 10 Miles Steady, or 6 Miles Recovery or whatever.

J o e wrote: »

Just seems very odd that a different unit system is used as standard depending on the distance you're running.

There isn't a different system depending on distance, people use whatever system they are comfortable with no matter what distance they are running, again not sure why it makes a difference to anyone what system someone else would use.

J o e wrote: »

One place where it would really bug me to use 2 different systems in on Strava, where I log all my runs. Your account has to be either metric or imperial and I have enough OCD to need to run an extra stretch up the road to round my 4.73km run up to 5km, or to round my 6.81 mile run up to 7miles. Flipping between two systems would be a mess! :P

But why would you need to flip between two systems? Pick one and stick to it.

joeKel73

J o e wrote: »

Just seems very odd that a different unit system is used as standard depending on the distance you're running.

adrian522 wrote: »

There isn't a different system depending on distance

The poll seems to confirm there is a different standard system used for shorter and longer distances...

"I train mostly for 5-10km races"


"I train mostly for half-marathons or further"

walshb

J o e wrote: »

The poll seems to confirm there is a different standard system used for shorter and longer distances...

"I train mostly for 5-10km races"


"I train mostly for half-marathons or further"

Makes perfect logical sense.

adrian522

J o e wrote: »

The poll seems to confirm there is a different standard system used for shorter and longer distances...

"I train mostly for 5-10km races"


"I train mostly for half-marathons or further"

I don't think it confirms anything. The phrase "mostly" is key here. People don't change their unit of measurement based on the race they are training for. There was no option for "I train for all distances" or whatever.

I don't think the distance people are training for has any bearing on the measurement they use in their training runs.

joeKel73

The word "mostly" is to simplify the poll and seperate the responses to relatively "shorter" and "longer" distance runners.

adrian522 wrote: »

I don't think the distance people are training for has any bearing on the measurement they use in their training runs.

So you take it as cooincidence that from 82 responses to the poll there's a very strong sway to kilometers for shorter runs and a strong sway to miles for longer runs?

adrian522

Well, myself and most people on here run all distances from 5K up to marathon so what section should I have voted in?

Are you saying you think people change how they think about pace/distance moth to month depending on what distance they are racing? Or are you saying that people who are newer to running (and probably running the shorter distances) would be more likely to use KM as a unit of measurement?

walshb

J o e wrote: »

The word "mostly" is to simplify the poll and seperate the responses to relatively "shorter" and "longer" distance runners.



So you take it as cooincidence that from 82 responses to the poll there's a very strong sway to kilometers for shorter runs and a strong sway to miles for longer runs?

No coincidence.

Races up to 10 k (circa 6 miles) are usually labeled and advertised in ks. Track races are completely ks apart from one.

Of course there are mile(s) races on the roads, but they are usually for distances that are kind of "made up."

4 miles, 5 miles....

10 mile road racing is common, but not as common as a 10 k road race.

4 miles, 5 miles is somewhat common, but not near as common as a 5 k road races and 10 k road races

The farther the race distance the rule-logic says that people start thinking more in miles...

I'd say for every 4 miles and 5 miles road races advertised there are 3-4 5 k and 10 k advertised road races.